The Anti-Hagel Campaign Begins

The 2012 election was not a wonderful experience for neoconservatives–and it was a disaster for their beloved hero, Bibi Netanyahu, a foreign leader who tried to influence the American presidential campaign. Indeed, they’ve been proven conclusively ridiculous over the past dozen years, but still they persist. Now they’re after former Senator Chuck Hagel, a possible Secretary of Defense.

Leading the campaign is Bill Kristol, who has written this thing in the Weekly Standard. Why does Kristol think Hagel is so awful? Because Hagel has spoken out against going to war with Iran, and opposed sanctions 12 years ago when Mohammed Khatami was Iran’s president and the possibility of a thaw was in the air, and favored talks with Syria’s Assad regime, a delusion shared by many Israeli leaders over the years. Hagel has also opposed the illegal expansion of Israel’s West Bank settlements. In short, he’s been a voice for sanity in the Middle East. Which, of course, puts him “out on the fringes” as far as Kristol’s concerned.

In fact, Kristol is acting–as always–as a hand puppet for AIPAC, which is quietly beginning to lobby against Hagel, I’m told. The funny thing is, a significant Kristol/AIPAC lobbying campaign would probably guarantee a Hagel nomination, given the way that the neocons, AIPAC and, most outrageously, Bibi Netanyahu worked against Obama in the 2012 campaign. The President probably would like nothing better than to send these folks a message, and a Hagel nomination would sail through the Senate, where he was popular among his colleagues.

Hagel is a Vietnam veteran who was severely wounded in action, and a Republican. He supported the war in Iraq at first, but wised up very quickly. He’s a good candidate for SecDef but, like John Kerry, he’s more a policy expert than an administrator, and the Pentagon severely needs administering now that overseas war operations are winding down and budget cuts take hold. There are others who’d also be good, and perhaps better administrators–Deputy Secretary Ashton Carter and former Under Secretary Michelle Flournoy are both fine candidates–but Hagel is a fine choice as well and given Kristol’s opposition, is probably now a shoo-in.

I agree with the Wahington Post that Chuck Hagel would make a very bad choice for Secretary of Defense for many of the reasons stated and that Flournoy is a much better choice.I would add that Chuck Hagel's comments are racist and condescending . Imagine anyone saying the NAACP or LA Raza intimidate many people.Defense Secretary is a job that needs someone who is very strong yet diplomatic not a hothead.

Jeez you are a repulsive twit. Kristol and hand-puppet of AIPAC. AIPAC working against Obama. Do you know ANYTHING about what you write about? Do you have any standards? One thing true of AIPAC - it's full of Jews. And - many are Dems. AIPAC's past Prez (Lee Rosenberg) is a Chicago Dem friend of Obama's for many years. Many AIPAC Board members and staffers are Dems. AIPAC does not get involved in Prez races, and is strictly bi-partisan. You complain about AIPAC's excessive power. Whatever influence it has is largely due to its being bi-partisan. Ask any AIPAC member (they are regular people) or member of Congress - even libs. Jerry Nadler, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi - all good friends of AIPAC. But your preference is to demonize rather than take a moment to understand, or God forbid, allow the possibility that those with whom you disagree might be acting in good faith. It probably took all your self-control not to call someone racist in this piece. It's amazing anyone reads you and that you can make a living with this drivel.

"In short, he’s been a voice for sanity in the Middle East. Which, of course, puts him “out on the fringes” as far as Kristol’s concerned."

In an area of the world where insanity is rampant a "voice for sanity" is just another name for road kill. Chuck Hagel is just another one of those naive fools such as Neville Chamberlain who never learned that when you sup with the devil you had better bring a long spoon.

OT, but the world ends Friday. Anybody going to do anything crazy? I don't mean republicans. They always do crazy things. Maybe that explains this past election. Why take it seriously since nobody was going to make it to the inauguration anyway.

Nothing to see here since the Congress Contraries continue march backward into history. And Sacredh I wish I could read your comments from years ago. That would be more interesting than the Daily News.

There's an error in the cited article, which says the president is "elected indirectly by electors." He is in fact elected directly by the electors, who cast their votes specifically for the office of president. If anyone can be said to elect the president indirectly, it's the individual voters.

And let's not sneer at Pon Raul, sacred. He tied for third in the electoral vote. Of course, so did you and I and Kevin Groenhagen and paulejb and even Freeinpa. But it's all in the Constitution, so nothing can be done, except maybe to discover that SCOTUS knows something we don't (which is hardly surprising these days).

Usually, much like like Cicero 2,000 years ago, they still whisper. Unfortunately.

"Softly! Softly! I want none but the judges to hear me. The Jews have already gotten me into a fine mess, as they have many other gentleman. I have no desire to furnish further grist for their mills." (Oration in Defense of Flaccus)

I will commence the dark ceremony to summon the unholy Outer Gods to our worlds as Obama has instructed me to do. Then after the purging of the unbelievers is complete we shall reign in 10,000 years of glorious wicked Socialism. This is the way the world will end, not with a bang, but a seance.

Sue_N, we're having our Christmas party at work Friday. What's the point? I work with all men. I'm thinking of telling them that the world's going to end so if anybody wants to take a walk on the wild side....

Kbang, I couldn't decide what to send some friends for Christmas so I went through a bunch of old photo albums, scanned the pictures into the computer, put them on CDs and sent them as gifts. One friend called me last night and told me a great story. He showed his son the pictures. His son was shocked at one picture. It was his dad with a hottie in a bikini that had just came out of the lake. She was licking his face. The son told him to get rid of the pictures before his mom saw them. He told his son "That IS your mom. You think I married her because she could cook?". Like most of us, she'd changed a great deal in 35 years.

Click on your name or ID at the top right. Click on "activity" in the window that opens. You'll get all your Disqus comments, all blogs, in reverse chronological order. It may take forever to scroll to a particular one, but they're still online, at least for now.

chupkar, I've been into taking pictures for over 40 years. I was the guy that was always annoying people by taking their pictures. I couldn't even count the number of times people threatened to "shove that camera up my ass" if I didn't put it away. Now I get calls from the same people asking me if I still have any of those old pictures left. I probably have thousands. Too many people keep putting things off thinking that there's always time later to take pictures and before you know it, they're gone. Friends and family have passed away, kids have grown up and life has aged us.

.

One thing I hate about digital cameras is that people delete the best pictures. Catching a stupid expression, a yawn or a ridulous dance move are the pictures I love.